We Are Connected to Our Environment
UNICEF Canada defines this domain as the relationship young people have with nature, including the quality of air, water, and soil, the protection of climate and ecosystems, and access to green spaces like parks and trails. It also emphasizes opportunities to act as stewards of the land and to be included in environmental decision-making. Our research asks: How do digital technologies shape young people’s knowledge of, care for, and connection to nature, and how do they affect environmental sustainability?
Watch Digital Portraits
Hear directly from Canadian Gen Z youth in these short videos. Filmed 2024–2025.
to choose from 26 videos
Research Snapshot
by: Dr. James Stinson
Across much of the world, researchers have identified a steady decline in outdoor recreation and direct interaction with the natural environment.
Part I: Digital Technology as a Barrier to Youth–Nature Connection
Pergams and Zaradic (2006, 2008) documented a long-term downturn in visits to U.S. national parks, which they linked to rising consumption of electronic media such as television, video games, and the internet. Their work points to a displacement effect, where time once devoted to physical immersion in nature is increasingly captured by digital entertainment. Kareiva (2008) described this decline in nature-based recreation as “ominous,” warning that reduced direct contact with nature has serious implications for the cultivation of environmental values and the willingness of future generations to protect biodiversity.
Soga and Gaston (2016) have referred to this broader phenomenon as an “extinction of experience,” in which fewer everyday opportunities to interact with nature erode both personal well-being and collective care for the environment. Wright and Matthews (2015) argue that parks research demonstrates how fostering direct experiences of nature is essential to building a long-term culture of conservation, while Lopoukhine et al. (2014) stress that global efforts to empower the next generation must explicitly confront the rise of screen-based entertainment, which is rapidly displacing time in nature for youth.
These global trends are clearly visible in Canada. The UNICEF baseline report on Canadian child and youth well-being highlights that fewer than half of Canadian young people report feeling strongly connected to nature, and only a minority spend time outdoors every day (UNICEF, 2019). This disconnect is occurring alongside rising rates of electronic screen use, as digital devices and online platforms increasingly dominate young people’s recreation and social interaction.
Canadian studies provide detailed evidence of this shift. Michaelson et al. (2020) found that screen technology use among adolescents was negatively associated with self-reported connection to nature, with higher use predicting weaker emotional ties to the natural world. A follow-up qualitative study found that while many adolescents expressed an appreciation for nature, they admitted to spending little actual time outdoors, citing digital distractions as a major factor (Michaelson et al., 2023). Parks Canada (2014) similarly highlighted that opportunities for outdoor play and nature-based learning are declining nationally, stressing the urgency of reversing this trend to protect the health and well-being of future generations.
Patterns of screen time and outdoor engagement also reflect geographic and cultural differences. Manyanga et al. (2022) found that rural youth were more likely than urban youth to meet physical activity and screen-time recommendations, suggesting that access to safe, proximate outdoor environments plays a protective role. Larson et al. (2019) noted that even in rural areas where nature is abundant, youth reported spending less time outdoors and more time on screens than in the past. Donnell and Rinkoff (2015) emphasize that cultural norms strongly shape children’s relationships with nature, and the normalization of screen-based entertainment is redefining these relationships for Canadian youth. Mockovcáková and Barrable (2024) add that parental influence and family routines are key factors in predicting children’s nature connectedness, but again digital technologies act as a strong competitor for children’s time and attention.
The impacts of this disconnection are wide-ranging. Piccininni et al. (2018) found that outdoor play and stronger connection to nature were linked to lower levels of internalized mental health symptoms in Canadian adolescents, suggesting that the displacement of outdoor experiences by screens carries consequences for psychological well-being.
Owais et al. (2024) further showed that Indigenous children are especially affected, with higher screen use associated with socioemotional and behavioral challenges, reflecting deeper inequities in access to supportive natural environments. Steininger et al. (2025) add that contact with natural environments produces measurable health benefits at the neurological level, with nature exposure inducing analgesic effects by influencing nociception-related brain processes. Such findings underscore what is lost when youth spend less time in physical natural settings.
Together, these findings paint a troubling picture. Digital technologies and rising screen use are key drivers of the disconnection of Canadian youth from nature. This disconnection not only undermines individual well-being but also reduces opportunities for young people to form the experiential, cultural, and emotional bonds with the environment that are essential to long-term stewardship. In the absence of intentional efforts to rebalance the place of outdoor experiences in young people’s lives, Canada risks deepening a generational divide from the very landscapes that have long been central to health, identity, and community (Parks Canada, 2014).
Part II: The Environmental Impacts of Digital Technologies Across the Lifecycle
Digital technologies are often promoted as immaterial, efficient, or “green” solutions, but mounting evidence shows that they are anything but. Both the Digital Economy Report (UNCTAD, 2024) and the United Nations Environment Programme’s issue note on Artificial Intelligence End-to-End (2024) stress that every stage of the digital lifecycle—extraction, production, use, and disposal—imposes heavy costs on ecosystems, natural resources, and communities.
From the mines that produce rare earths for smartphones, to the water-intensive data centres that power artificial intelligence (AI), and the growing mountains of hazardous electronic waste, digital infrastructures have significant environmental impacts. Understanding these impacts is essential for evaluating how digital technologies affect not only the environment but also the ability of younger generations to grow up with access to healthy ecosystems.
Extraction and production
The lifecycle of digital devices begins with the extraction of raw materials. Computers, smartphones, tablets, and servers depend on critical minerals like cobalt, lithium, and other rare earth elements. As the Digital Economy Report makes clear, manufacturing a single computer weighing just two kilograms requires as much as 800 kilograms of raw materials (UNCTAD, 2024).
UNEP (2024) warns that these materials are often mined under unsustainable conditions, leading to habitat destruction, water contamination, and social harms in extraction regions. Mining for cobalt in the Democratic Republic of the Congo or rare earths in China, for example, not only devastates local ecosystems but also exposes workers and nearby communities to toxic substances (UNCTAD, 2024).
These extraction pressures are not abstract for Canada: the global demand for critical minerals is reshaping Canadian mining policy and development, particularly in northern regions where Indigenous communities are already facing ecological and cultural pressures (Brodie, 2020). The growth of AI further amplifies this demand, as chips for AI rely on highly refined rare elements and expanding production (UNEP, 2024).
The production stage also carries heavy energy costs. The Digital Economy Report stresses that most of the lifetime energy of a smartphone or laptop is consumed before it ever reaches a user, during extraction, manufacturing, and assembly—embodied energy that makes the footprint of a new device far larger than everyday charging or use (UNCTAD, 2024). Canada’s infrastructure for processing e-waste is insufficient to capture the full impacts of this production cycle, as many devices are exported rather than recycled domestically (Kumar & Holuszko, 2016).
Use phase: energy, water, and emissions
Once in use, digital technologies continue to exact a heavy toll. Rapid growth in data traffic from streaming, cloud computing, social media, and AI is driving steep increases in energy consumption. The Digital Economy Report estimates that global data centres consumed about 460 TWh of electricity in 2022; the International Energy Agency projects this could more than double to 1,000 TWh by 2026 (UNCTAD, 2024).
UNEP (2024) emphasizes that AI infrastructures are particularly resource-intensive: a single AI-generated prompt can require roughly ten times more electricity than a standard search and training a large model such as Microsoft’s GPT-3 consumed an estimated 700,000 litres of clean freshwater in U.S. data centres. Cooling systems for servers draw vast amounts of freshwater, a critical issue as water scarcity deepens. The geographic impacts are already visible. In Ireland, a major tech hub, UNEP (2024) estimates that by 2026 data centres could account for nearly 35 per cent of national electricity use.
At a global scale, the number of data centres has surged from roughly 500,000 in 2012 to more than 8 million today, driven largely by AI expansion, with demands expected to keep growing (UNEP, 2024). In Canada, expansion of data centres could place significant pressure on electricity systems and increase emissions unless renewable generation is scaled (Dandres et al., 2017), and local communities already report land-use conflicts, water strain, and noise from new facilities (Lifset et al., 2025).
Crucially, environmental impacts in the use phase depend not only on how much devices are used but also on what activities they are used for and the devices themselves (UNCTAD, 2024). Digital services range from web browsing and messaging to social media, video conferencing, streaming, and AI-powered applications, each relying on infrastructure in different ways (UNCTAD, 2024). The carbon footprint of streaming has drawn attention: one widely cited estimate equated 30 minutes of streaming with driving 6.5 km, or about 6.1 kWh per viewing hour (UNCTAD, 2024, p. 92). Yet the actual impact varies greatly by device and grid mix.
Watching video on a 50-inch LED TV uses roughly 100 times more electricity per hour than streaming on a smartphone, and five times more than on a laptop; using smaller devices and keeping them longer is therefore an effective way to reduce streaming’s footprint (UNCTAD, 2024). By contrast, AI workloads have no “low impact” equivalent: training and running large language models require thousands of GPUs running around the clock, concentrating power and water demand.
Streaming is a challenge of ubiquity, spread across billions of users, whereas AI is a challenge of intensity, with disproportionate footprints per transaction; both require action, but strategies differ (UNCTAD, 2024; UNEP, 2024). These digital systems also draw on energy resources in complex ways; for example, compute-intensive industries like cryptocurrency have been shown to exploit hydropower and reshape regional ecologies (Lally et al., 2022).
End-of-life: e-waste and pollution
Disposal marks a growing e-waste crisis. Globally, more than 60 million tonnes of e-waste were generated in 2022 (UNCTAD, 2024). Much of this waste contains hazardous substances, such as mercury and lead, which can leach into soils and water if improperly handled; the rapid turnover of specialized hardware for AI risks worsening this problem (UNEP, 2024). In Canada, Habib et al. (2023) provided the first comprehensive estimate of e-waste, showing annual generation rose from ~252,000 tonnes in 2000 to ~954,000 tonnes in 2020 and could reach ~1.2 million tonnes per year by 2030, with per-capita e-waste projected to rise from 25.3 kg (2020) to ~31.5 kg by 2030.
Canada’s recycling and processing routes remain limited in scope and effectiveness (Kumar & Holuszko, 2016); international flows shift a portion of Canadian e-waste to jurisdictions with weaker environmental protections (Lepawsky & McNabb, 2010). Extended producer responsibility exists but remains difficult to enforce (Leclerc & Badami, 2020), while provincial stewardship models vary in cost-effectiveness (Tasnim et al., 2024).
Circular-economy strategies—repair, reuse, safer recycling—are needed to reduce harms and recover materials (Xavier et al., 2021). More broadly, rapid device turnover linked to limited repairability and short design lifespans accelerates e-waste generation and undermines sustainability (Habib et al., 2023; Kumar & Holuszko, 2016).
Part III: Digital Technologies as Tools for Youth–Nature Connection and Environmental Action
Enhancing Awareness and Environmental Education
Digital media can play an important role in increasing awareness of environmental issues and fostering pro-environmental attitudes (Silk et al., 2021). Arendt and Matthes (2016) found that watching nature documentaries enhanced viewers’ sense of connection to nature and promoted pro-environmental behavior. Similarly, Downs et al. (2023) reported that the Netflix series Our Planet influenced adolescents’ feelings of closeness to nature. In Canada, conservation organizations have increasingly relied on digital platforms to sustain local engagement. During COVID-19 lockdowns, social media campaigns were used to encourage families to explore nearby natural spaces, helping sustain connections despite restrictions (Arts et al., 2022).
Immersive storytelling technologies are also emerging as valuable tools. Levstek et al. (2024) evaluated the BBC’s Green Planet augmented reality (AR) experience and found that immersive encounters with digital nature enhanced empathy for ecosystems and encouraged pro-environmental behaviors. Crowley et al. (2021) demonstrated that even virtual ecologies within video games such as Red Dead Redemption 2 can hold educational value, particularly if paired with broader conservation messaging.
Carabott and McLeod (2025) show how the narrative “storying” potential of video games can be used in educational settings to foster empathy and engagement with environmental themes, suggesting games can act as powerful storytelling platforms. Lu et al. (2023) further illustrate how player engagement in environmentally themed games like Alba: A Wildlife Adventure can create meaningful reflections on human–environment relationships.
Augmented reality gaming provides another pathway. Dorward et al. (2017) found that Pokémon Go mobilized large numbers of people outdoors, creating opportunities for conservation organizations to reach new audiences (see also Sandbrook et al., 2015). Similarly, Dunn et al. (2021) studied Wildeverse, an AR mobile game designed for conservation, and showed it could positively influence pro-conservation behaviors. These examples highlight how playful engagement with technology can spark curiosity about nature among youth otherwise drawn to digital environments.
Citizen Science and Participatory Engagement
Mobile technologies and apps create opportunities for youth to directly engage in citizen science. Altrudi (2021) showed how iNaturalist, a community-based biodiversity observation platform, deepens users’ ties to local environments by encouraging exploration, observation, and data sharing. Beyond biodiversity, new models of digital citizen science are emerging in Canada and internationally. Walker et al. (2023) evaluated a longitudinal Indigenous youth citizen science project that used mobile technologies to explore the role of culture in mental health, finding that participation empowered youth to articulate resilience strategies grounded in community.
Kannan et al. (2025) further showed how Indigenous youth used citizen science during COVID-19 school closures to document both mental health challenges and resilience strategies, demonstrating the potential of citizen science for advancing health and environmental justice. Similarly, Sones et al. (2024) used participatory citizen science with youth in under-resourced neighbourhoods to identify environmental determinants of social connectedness, highlighting how digital methods can uncover critical equity issues in urban environments. These findings build on the global movement described by Lopoukhine et al. (2014), where citizen science and youth programs are essential to counteract screen-based disconnection and strengthen a culture of conservation.
Digital technologies can also support sustainable environmental action through search and information platforms. Palos-Sanchez and Saura (2018) showed that green search engines such as Ecosia, which direct advertising revenues toward tree planting, influence afforestation efforts. Zehendner and Cron (2021) found that millennials engage with Ecosia because of its clear ecological benefits and transparent reporting, suggesting such tools can shift everyday digital behavior toward conservation. These examples show that even routine online activity can be redesigned to align with sustainability goals.
Promoting Activism and Climate Action
Digital technologies also amplify youth voices in environmental governance. Social media platforms enable Canadian youth to organize climate strikes, share knowledge, and connect with global peers. Warner (2024) stresses that digital platforms, combined with outdoor learning and nature immersion, are vital for empowering youth as advocates for planetary health. Film and storytelling have proven especially powerful.
Terry (2020) describes how youth use planetary health films to amplify their voices, linking personal experiences of environmental change to global audiences. Terry (2023) further documents how young people have used film at United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) meetings to directly influence policy debates, showing how media production can bridge local experiences and international governance.
Tilleczek et al. (2023) expand on this by advocating for youth-centred planetary health education, where digital storytelling is integrated into curricula to help youth connect ecological crises to their own lived experiences. These initiatives illustrate how technology, when put in young people’s hands, becomes a tool not only for learning but also for political participation and leadership. Together, these examples demonstrate that when digital technologies are harnessed for storytelling and organizing, they expand the capacity of young people to act as agents of climate action and environmental justice.
AI, Smart Earth, and Environmental Monitoring
Beyond youth engagement, digital technologies are powerful for environmental governance. UNEP (2024) highlights how AI is already being used to map destructive activities such as illegal sand dredging and to detect methane emissions from oil and gas infrastructure. The emerging field of “Smart Earth” research, for instance, examines how digital infrastructures—ranging from satellites to AI platforms—are reshaping global environmental governance. Bakker and Ritts (2018) note that while Smart Earth technologies offer opportunities for improved monitoring and decision-making, they raise concerns about power, accountability, and uneven access.
Ritts and Bakker (2025) extend this argument, calling attention to how smart environments alter relations between citizens, states, and ecosystems, with significant implications for sustainability. Drakopulos et al. (2023) illustrate this dynamic in practice, showing how Global Fishing Watch, a satellite- and data-driven platform, both illuminates and obscures key aspects of global oceans governance, raising critical questions about transparency and equity.
At the governance level, the Digital Economy Report (UNCTAD, 2024) stresses the importance of integrating digital infrastructure with sustainability goals, including renewable-powered data centres, more efficient algorithms, and circular-economy approaches to hardware. Xavier et al. (2021) similarly highlight how circular frameworks for e-waste management in Canada can reduce ecological harm while ensuring responsible resource use.
Toward Sustainable Digital Engagement
Taken together, the evidence suggests that digital technologies can be leveraged to reconnect Canadian youth to nature and support sustainable futures. Apps like iNaturalist (Altrudi, 2021), immersive storytelling (Levstek et al., 2024), carefully designed games (Dunn et al., 2021; Dorward et al., 2017; Carabott & McLeod, 2025; Lu et al., 2023), and green search engines (Palos-Sanchez & Saura, 2018; Zehendner & Cron, 2021) offer engaging ways to blend digital and outdoor worlds.
Educational media, from documentaries to AR experiences, can inspire curiosity and empathy (Arendt & Matthes, 2016; Downs et al., 2023). Social platforms amplify youth activism (Warner, 2024; Terry, 2023), while AI, Smart Earth tools, and citizen science enhance environmental monitoring and governance (Walker et al., 2023; Kannan et al., 2025; Sones et al., 2024; UNEP, 2024; Bakker & Ritts, 2018; Ritts & Bakker, 2025; Drakopulos et al., 2023).
Yet researchers caution that these benefits only emerge when digital technologies are thoughtfully deployed alongside meaningful physical access to land and outdoor experiences (Hatala et al., 2024; Michaelson et al., 2020). As Webber et al. (2023) argue, technology can extend awareness, participation, and behavior change, but it should complement, not replace, embodied time in nature.
How to Cite this Text: Stinson, J. (2025). We Are Connected to Our Environment. In Digital Wellbeing Hub. Young Lives Research Lab. https://www.digitalwellbeinghub.ca/we-are-connected-to-our-environment — Funded by the Government of Canada.
Resources
*
Resources *
Explore Resources By:
Research – Reports, articles, findings, background reading
For Youth – Interactive tools, guides, and activities designed for youth
Supporting Youth – Resources for educators, parents, policymakers, and practitioners
The Future is Now: The Environment & Children’s Wellbeing in Canada
UNICEF Canada (2022)
Canadian companion to Report Card 17 on how environmental factors shape children’s wellbeing.
Read Report (PDF)
Climate Emotions & Anxiety among Young People in Canada
Galway & Field (2023) — J. Climate Change & Health
National survey on climate emotions and a call to action.
Read Study
The Hidden Footprint of AI: Climate, Water, & Justice Costs
Hastings Initiative (2025)
How AI systems extract energy, water, minerals, and labour—often from vulnerable communities.
Read Brief (PDF)
Screen Tech Use & Connection to Nature (Mixed Methods, Canada)
Michaelson et al. (2020) — CJPH
Explores how screen use relates to adolescents’ connection with nature.
Read Study
Digital Technologies & Environmental Education
Lowan-Trudeau (2023) — JEE
Weighs the pedagogical benefits and social, health, and environmental impacts of digital tech in EE.
Read Article
Children & Nature Network: Research Library
Global evidence hub
Search the world’s largest collection of peer-reviewed literature on nature’s benefits for children.
Explore Library
UNESCO: From Clicks to Progress — Youth Digital Pathways
UNESCO (2021)
Stories and insights on how youth use digital pathways for sustainable development.
Read Article
UNCTAD: Digitalization & Environmental Sustainability
Digital Economy Report 2024 — Chapter I
Life-cycle impacts of digital products & systems at the nexus of digitalization and sustainability.
Read Chapter (PDF)
Well Beings: Conversation Card Deck
Young Lives Research Lab
An easy-to-play game designed to spark meaningful conversations about wellbeing in a digital age. Developed by our Canadian Youth Advisory Committee in the research project Partnership for Youth and Planetary Wellbeing.
Play Now
Net Zero You(th) Toolkit
Apathy Is Boring (2024)
Learn, act, and lead on climate & net zero with a youth-friendly toolkit.
Download (PDF)
Archive Our Youth
Young Lives Research Lab
Explore and add to this time capsule of youth and planetary wellbeing in a digital age. Created by our Youth Advisory Committee in the Partnership for Youth and Planetary Wellbeing project.
Visit the Archive
Future Ground Network
David Suzuki Foundation
A hub for Canadian community groups taking local action to secure healthier, more viable futures
Visit Now
Park People
Park People
Park People connects people and communities with the tools they need to create great parks for everyone.
Visit
Rooted and Rising
Rooted and Rising Lab
An intergenerational network creating climate education programs for people re-membering how to care with the natural world. Find resources and programs.
Visit the Lab
‘Underconsumption Core’ Challenges Consumer Culture
The Conversation (2024)
How a new trend is pushing back on consumerism—ideas you can use in daily life.
Read Article
Virtual Visits with Parks Canada
Trails & Parks
Explore parks digitally—then plan your next in-person nature day.
Start Exploring
Sierra Club Canada — Join Now
National grassroots
Get involved in environmental action and community projects across Canada.
Get Involved
WILD Outside (Ages 15–18)
Canadian Wildlife Federation
Conservation-based community service & leadership program for teens.
Learn More
Outdoor Play Canada
National network
Connect with leaders and groups championing outdoor play across Canada.
Visit Site
Children & Nature Network — Get Involved
Opportunities & ideas
Find ways to connect with nature advocacy and youth programs.
Get Involved
Ecosia
Search that plants trees
Use the free search engine/app that funds tree planting and climate action.
Try Ecosia
Fish Doorbell (Netherlands)
Help migrating fish in March
Watch the live canal cam and press the “doorbell” to let fish through the gate.
Ring the Bell
Explore.org — Live Animal & Nature Cams
Quiet, beautiful, grounding
Watch wildlife streams from around the world and unwind in nature.
Watch Live
Youth Climate Report
UNFCCC partner project
Global database of 1,000+ short films by youth, including 300+ from Canadian youth.
Explore Films
Geocaching (App)
Join the world’s largest treasure hunt
Head outdoors and discover hidden caches with GPS on your phone.
Get the App
The ChariTree Foundation: Environmental Education & Tree Planting
Canada
Support for Canadian environmental education and tree-planting projects.
Projects Teacher ResourcesExplore More Dimensions of Wellbeing
Complete the Survey!
Join the research conversation and see what others are saying (no email required).
View Live Results
photo by: Polina Vaynshtok
Works Cited
Altrudi, S. (2021). Connecting to nature through tech? The case of the iNaturalist app. Convergence, 27(1), 124–141. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354856520933064
Anderson, D. J., & Krettenauer, T. (2021). Connectedness to nature and pro-environmental behaviour from early adolescence to adulthood: A comparison of urban and rural Canada. Sustainability, 13(7), 3655. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13073655
Arendt, F., & Matthes, J. (2016). Nature documentaries, connectedness to nature, and pro-environmental behavior. Environmental Communication, 10(4), 453–472. https://doi.org/10.1080/17524032.2014.993415
Arts, I., Duckett, D., Fischer, A., & Van Der Wal, R. (2022). Communicating nature during lockdown: How conservation and outdoor organisations use social media to facilitate local nature experiences. People and Nature, 4(5), 1292–1304. https://doi.org/10.1002/pan3.10387
Bakker, K., & Ritts, M. (2018). Smart Earth: A meta-review and implications for environmental governance. Global Environmental Change, 52, 201–211. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2018.07.011
Brodie, P. (2020). Climate extraction and supply chains of data. Media, Culture & Society, 42(7–8), 1095–1114. https://doi.org/10.1177/0163443720939453
Carabott, K., & McLeod, A. (2025, March). Playing video games: The educational power of “storying”. In Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference (pp. 395–399). Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). https://www.learntechlib.org/primary/p/230207/
Chan, S. H. M., Qiu, L., & Xie, T. (2023). Understanding experiences in metaverse: How virtual nature impacts affect, pro-environmental attitudes, and intention to engage with physical nature. Computers in Human Behavior, 149, 107926. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2023.107926
Crowley, E. J., Silk, M. J., & Crowley, S. L. (2021). The educational value of virtual ecologies in Red Dead Redemption 2. People and Nature, 3(6), 1229–1243. https://doi.org/10.1002/pan3.10251
Dandres, T., Vandromme, N., Obrekht, G., Wong, A., Nguyen, K. K., Lemieux, Y., Cheriet, M., & Samson, R. (2017). Consequences of future data center deployment in Canada on electricity generation and environmental impacts: A 2015–2030 prospective study. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 21(5), 1312–1322. https://doi.org/10.1111/jiec.12519
Donnell, A., & Rinkoff, R. (2015). The influence of culture on children’s relationships with nature. Children, Youth and Environments, 25(3), 62–89. https://doi.org/10.7721/chilyoutenvi.25.3.0062
Dorward, L. J., Mittermeier, J. C., Sandbrook, C., & Spooner, F. (2017). Pokémon Go: Benefits, costs, and lessons for the conservation movement. Conservation Letters, 10(1), 160–165. https://doi.org/10.1111/conl.12326
Downs, K. B., Schultz, C., Stonehouse, P., & Faircloth, B. (2023). Teaching through the screen: How Our Planet impacts adolescents’ feelings of connection to nature. Interdisciplinary Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 19(4), e2316. https://doi.org/10.29333/ijese/13178
Drakopulos, L., Silver, J. J., Nost, E., Gray, N., & Hawkins, R. (2023). Making global oceans governance in/visible with Smart Earth: The case of Global Fishing Watch. Environment and Planning E: Nature and Space, 6(2), 1098–1113. https://doi.org/10.1177/25148486221116638
Dunn, M. E., Shah, G., & Veríssimo, D. (2021). Stepping into the Wildeverse: Evaluating the impact of augmented reality mobile gaming on pro-conservation behaviours. People and Nature, 3(6), 1205–1217. https://doi.org/10.1002/pan3.10229
Habib, K., Mohammadi, E., & Withanage, S. V. (2023). A first comprehensive estimate of electronic waste in Canada. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 448, 130865. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2023.130865
Hatala, A. R., Morton, D., Deschenes, C., & Bird-Naytowhow, K. (2024). Access to land and nature as health determinants: A qualitative analysis exploring meaningful human–nature relationships among Indigenous youth in central Canada. BMC Public Health, 24(1), 2540. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-024-17869-y
Kannan, P., Bhawra, J., Wright, K., & Katapally, T. R. (2025). Mental health challenges and resilience strategies of Indigenous youth citizen scientists living in rural areas during COVID-19 school closures. PLOS Mental Health, 2(6), e0000256. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmental.0000256
Kareiva, P. (2008). Ominous trends in nature recreation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 105(8), 2757–2758. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0800474105
Kumar, A., & Holuszko, M. (2016). Electronic waste and existing processing routes: A Canadian perspective. Resources, 5(4), 35. https://doi.org/10.3390/resources5040035
Lally, N., Kay, K., & Thatcher, J. (2022). Computational parasites and hydropower: A political ecology of Bitcoin mining on the Columbia River. Environment and Planning E: Nature and Space, 5(1), 18–38. https://doi.org/10.1177/2514848619867608
Larson, L. R., Szczytko, R., Bowers, E. P., Stephens, L. E., Stevenson, K. T., & Floyd, M. F. (2019). Outdoor time, screen time, and connection to nature: Troubling trends among rural youth? Environment and Behavior, 51(8), 966–991. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916518788600
Leclerc, S. H., & Badami, M. G. (2020). Extended producer responsibility for e-waste management: Policy drivers and challenges. Journal of Cleaner Production, 251, 119657. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.119657
Lepawsky, J., & McNabb, C. (2010). Mapping international flows of electronic waste. The Canadian Geographer / Le Géographe canadien, 54(2), 177–195. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1541-0064.2009.00279.x
Levstek, M., Papworth, S., Woods, A., Archer, L., Arshad, I., Dodds, K., Holdstock, J. S., Bennett, J., & Dalton, P. (2024). Immersive storytelling for pro-environmental behaviour change: The Green Planet augmented reality experience. Computers in Human Behavior, 161, 108379. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2024.108379
Lifset, R., Raparla, P., Stein, A., Bridges, L., McElfish, J., & Cywinski, T. (2025). Local environmental impacts of data center proliferation. Environmental Law Reporter, 55, 10131. https://elr.info
Lopoukhine, N., Wheeler, K., Keenleyside, K., Charles, C., Koss, R., & Nicoll, R. (2014). Empowering the next generation to connect with nature: A global movement. Parks, 20, 49–60. https://doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.CH.2014.PARKS-20-1NL.en
Lu, C., Lauritano, G., Nummenmaa, T., & Peltonen, J. (2023, June). Human–environment relationships in Alba: A typological analysis of player engagement in Steam reviews. In Proceedings of DiGRA 2023 Conference. http://www.digra.org/digital-library/publications/human-environment-relationships-in-alba-a-typological-analysis-of-player-engagement-in-steam-reviews/
Manyanga, T., Pelletier, C., Prince, S. A., Lee, E. Y., Sluggett, L., & Lang, J. J. (2022). A comparison of meeting physical activity and screen time recommendations between Canadian youth living in rural and urban communities. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19(7), 4394. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19074394
Michaelson, V., King, N., Janssen, I., Lawal, S., & Pickett, W. (2020). Electronic screen technology use and connection to nature in Canadian adolescents: A mixed methods study. Canadian Journal of Public Health, 111(4), 502–514. https://doi.org/10.17269/s41997-020-00320-0
Michaelson, V., Wadge, S., Peters, M., Khan, S., Pilato, K. A., & Gardner, P. (2023). “I don’t like it, but it is nice…”: A qualitative study of Canadian young people and contemporary experiences of nature. Wellbeing, Space and Society, 5, 100169. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wss.2023.100169
Mockovcáková, A., & Barrable, A. (2024). Factors associated with nature connection in children: A review, synthesis, and implications for practice within environmental education and beyond. International Journal of Early Childhood Environmental Education, 11(2), 26–42.
Owais, S., Ospina, M. B., Ford, C., Hill, T., Savoy, C. D., & Van Lieshout, R. (2024). Screen time and socioemotional and behavioural difficulties among Indigenous children in Canada. The Canadian Journal of Psychiatry, 69(5), 337–346. https://doi.org/10.1177/07067437231159418
Palos-Sanchez, P., & Saura, J. R. (2018). The effect of internet searches on afforestation: The case of a green search engine. Forests, 9(2), 51. https://doi.org/10.3390/f9020051
Parks Canada. (2014). Connecting Canadians with nature: An investment in the well-being of our citizens. Parks Canada Agency. http://www.parks-parcs.ca/english/ConnectingCanadians-English_web.pdf
Passmore, H. A., Martin, L., Richardson, M., White, M., Hunt, A., & Pahl, S. (2021). Parental/guardians’ connection to nature better predicts children’s nature connectedness than visits or area-level characteristics. Ecopsychology, 13(2), 103–113. https://doi.org/10.1089/eco.2020.0063
Pergams, O. R., & Zaradic, P. A. (2006). Is love of nature in the US becoming love of electronic media? 16-year downtrend in national park visits explained by watching movies, playing video games, internet use, and oil prices. Journal of Environmental Management, 80(4), 387–393. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2006.02.001
Pergams, O. R., & Zaradic, P. A. (2008). Evidence for a fundamental and pervasive shift away from nature-based recreation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 105(7), 2295–2300. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0709893105
Piccininni, C., Michaelson, V., Janssen, I., & Pickett, W. (2018). Outdoor play and nature connectedness as potential correlates of internalized mental health symptoms among Canadian adolescents. Preventive Medicine, 112, 168–175. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ypmed.2018.04.011
Rillig, M. C., Gould, K. A., Maeder, M., Kim, S. W., Dueñas, J. F., Pinek, L., Lehmann, A., & Bielcik, M. (2022). Opportunities and risks of the “metaverse” for biodiversity and the environment. Environmental Science & Technology, 56(8), 4721–4723. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.2c01953
Ritts, M., & Bakker, K. (2025). Smart environments: Implications for environmental governance. Global Environmental Change, 81, 102788. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2023.102788
Sandbrook, C., Adams, W. M., & Monteferri, B. (2015). Digital games and biodiversity conservation. Conservation Letters, 8(2), 118–124. https://doi.org/10.1111/conl.12113
Silk, M., Correia, R., Veríssimo, D., Verma, A., & Crowley, S. L. (2021). The implications of digital visual media for human–nature relationships. People and Nature, 3(6), 1130–1137. https://doi.org/10.1002/pan3.10215
Soga, M., & Gaston, K. J. (2016). Extinction of experience: The loss of human–nature interactions. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 14(2), 94–101. https://doi.org/10.1002/fee.1225
Sones, M., Holden, M., Kestens, Y., King, A. C., Rennie, M., & Winters, M. (2024). (Dis) connected by design? Using participatory citizen science to uncover environmental determinants of social connectedness for youth in under-resourced neighbourhoods. BMC Public Health, 24(1), 3104. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-024-16855-w
Steininger, M. O., White, M. P., Lengersdorff, L., Zhang, L., Smalley, A. J., Kühn, S., & Lamm, C. (2025). Nature exposure induces analgesic effects by acting on nociception-related neural processing. Nature Communications, 16(1), 2037. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-025-14249-6
Tasnim, A., Chowdhury, R., Mim, S. J., Ng, K. T. W., & Adu-Darko, H. (2024). Influence of Canadian provincial stewardship model attributes on the cost effectiveness of e-waste management. Journal of Environmental Management, 358, 120945. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2023.120945
Terry, M. (2020). Amplifying the voice of youth through planetary health films. The Lancet Planetary Health, 4(12), e549–e550. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2542-5196(20)30278-9
Terry, M. (2023). Lights! Camera! Action! The use of film by youth and the UNFCCC. In Speaking Youth to Power: Influencing Climate Policy at the United Nations (pp. 177–210). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-23222-8_9
Thomas, S. (2013). Virtual nature makes us feel good even if it’s Farmville. The Conversation. https://theconversation.com/virtual-nature-makes-us-feel-good-even-if-its-farmville-21099
Tilleczek, K. C., Terry, M., MacDonald, D., Orbinski, J., & Stinson, J. (2023). Towards youth-centred planetary health education. Challenges, 14(1), 3. https://doi.org/10.3390/challe14010003
Truong, M. A., & Clayton, S. (2020). Technologically transformed experiences of nature: A challenge for environmental conservation? Biological Conservation, 244, 108532. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2020.108532
UNCTAD. (2024). 2024 Digital Economy Report: Shaping an environmentally sustainable and inclusive digital future. United Nations Conference on Trade and Development. https://unctad.org/system/files/official
Recent Comments
Only comments that meet our community standards are shown.